“In
a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
“Political language . . . is designed to make lies sound truthful
and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure
wind.” -George Orwell, author and Fabian Socialist

In my
article, “Incrementalism,
Regionalism and Revolution,” I briefly touched on planning and
quoted from author, Jo Hindman. She will again help me explain what is
happening vis a vis Urban Renewal and metro-planning. From her
book, Blame Metro, we read, “Much is written about the
incognito warfare on United States soil which public officials and their
accomplices are waging to wrest private property from landowners. The
strategy is to make property ownership so unbearable by harassment through
building inspections, remodeling orders, fines and jailings, that owners
give up in despair and sell to land redevelopers at cut-rate prices. Positive
municipal codes are the weapons in the warfare.”[1]

Note,
Hindman wrote that in 1966, yet it fully applies to today’s attacks
on private property; many of the same strategies are being used, they
just “changed the names to protect the guilty.”

Hindman
writes, “‘Strengthening county government’ is a hackneyed
Metro phrase indicating that the Metro take-over has begun. . .. Planning
assistance subsidized by Federal money leads small cities and counties
into direct obedience under a regional master plan. Land use rights are
literally stolen (ital. mine) from landowners when zoning is
applied to land.”[2]

Mimicking
today’s ICLEI V.P. Harvey
Ruvin, the 60s’ American Institute of Planners “makes
no bones about its socialist stance regarding land; its constitution states
AIP’s ‘particular sphere of activity shall be the planning
of the unified development of urban communities and their environs and
of states, regions, and the nation as expressed through determination
of the comprehensive arrangement of land uses and land occupancy and the
regulation thereof.[4]
. . .The present-day crew of planners, drawing no line between public
and private property, believe that land-use control should be vested in
government and that public planners should have sole right to control
the use of all land.”[5]

That
is not just similar to what is going on today; that is exactly what is
happening. Why? Because the sons, daughters and cronies of the puppeteers
that were pulling the strings back in the beginning and middle of the
20th Century are pulling the strings of today’s planners. We just
have a new generation of the same treacherous, thieving scheme updated
with new-fangled, high-tech sounding names for the same old land (and
people) control mechanisms.

Planners
took that technique, one that was designed for studying flora and fauna,
and tweaked it to apply to humans. I would say the tweak was more a wrenching,
actually it is more in the line of suspending critical thinking to superimpose
the artificial and nonsensical process of the transect on humans and their
mobilization.

Under
the biological study, a transect shows where certain flora and fauna thrive,
exist somewhat readily or barely subsist in the different habitats from
(get description i.e., arctic to tropical). With great literary(?) license,
planners take the definition of biologic transect and, like Oliver Stone
rewrites history, these planners are rewriting biology; they want to play
an active role in the phylogeny of homo sapiens, in fact they
want to devolve it. One of the problem here is that their fairy tale is
being used to take property rights (and thus liberty) from man and make
him a slave. Laws should not be based upon make-believe. Yet this country,
no the entire world is being redesigned using Communitarians’ far-fetched,
pseudo-utopian desires to sate the global elites’ desire to control
the entire globe.

Look
at their definition of transect for people and land planning: “Human
beings also thrive in different habitats. Some people prefer urban centers
and would suffer in a rural place, while others thrive in the rural or
suburban zones. Before the automobile, American development patterns were
walkable, and transects within towns and city neighborhoods revealed areas
that were less urban and more urban in character. This urbanism could
be analyzed as natural transects are analyzed.”[Link]

To compare
humans in differing habitats with flora or fauna is absurd, and especially
because the planners are using apples and oranges: “some people
prefer urban centers and would suffer in a rural place,” does not
mean the same thing as the biology transect means. The suffering would
be a mental fabrication and would be such that to call it suffering in
the same sense as plants or animals outside their natural habitat is absurd.

The
planners also extol the virtues of the time before the automobile, “American
development patterns were walkable, and transects within towns and city
neighborhoods revealed areas that were less urban and more
urban in character. This urbanism could be analyzed as natural transects
are analyzed.” As if what we have today is “unnatural.”
What these planners keep forgetting (and want us to forget also) is that
we humans are part of nature and thus what we are and what we do is
natural. Unlike other animals, we humans have a moral and cognitive
brain. Our brain is what provides us with the necessary tools we need
to survive and prosper, and one of those tools is the automobile.

So we
have a convoluted, computer-modeled construct of what the entire ecosystem
of the world should be and is called the Transect. But as with everything
else in this New World Order newspeak, that really isn’t the truth.
No, they did not sit down with the details of biological transect and
translate it via computer modeling to a human/development version. What
they did was take The Ideal Communist City[6]
and figured out how to sell it to the American public by superimposing
it over the Transect model.

The APA describes the Transect as “a geographical cross-section
of a region used to reveal a sequence of environments. For human environments,
this cross-section can be used to identify urban character, a continuum
that ranges from rural to urban. In transect planning, this range of environments
is the basis for organizing the components of the built world: building,
lot, land use, street, and all of the other physical elements of the human
habitat.[7]
Pay close attention to that last sentence, “the basis for organizing
the components of the built world.” In my understanding of English,
that means telling us where each component of our lives goes; we don’t
get to choose where we build our homes unless they in the area designated
by planners. I am not misreading that because that same sentence continues,
“building, lot, land use, street, and all of the other physical
elements of the human habitat (ital. mine).” Sounds fairly
simple to me, we will be told what and where we may build or even if
we may build.

To continue
from the APA article, “In transect planning, the essential task
is to find the main qualities of immersive environments,[8]
.... Once these are discovered, transect planning principles are applied
to rectify the inappropriate intermixing of rural and urban elements --
better known as sprawl. This is done by eliminating the ‘urbanizing
of the rural’. . . or, equally damaging, the ‘ruralizing of
the urban.

Subscribe
to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter
Your E-Mail Address:

“To
aid in the specification of different types of immersive environments,
the rural-to-urban continuum can be segmented into discrete categories.
This approach is also dictated by the requirement that human habitats
fit within the language of our current approach to land regulation
(i.e., zoning).”[9]

The
discrete categories of the transect continuum run from Rural Preserve,
Rural Reserve, Sub-Urban, General Urban, Urban Center to Urban Core. Understand
that the Rural Preserve is the Wildlands, the area humans will be forbidden
to enter, and the Rural Reserve will be the connecting corridors to the
Reserve area, i.e., corridors for fauna movement and human use will be
highly restricted.

Remember,
as I pointed out at the beginning of this article, the Communitarians,
or global elites, introduced the zoning and planning systems used in this
country. Now that they have gotten the American public inured to “planning,”
they want to move us to the next step -- where they plan every aspect
of our lives through planning. To do so, they have to pretend that the
original zones and plans came from us, the people, so they can say they
need to throw the old ones out and introduce a whole new system. We are
told, “The
most important obstacle to overcome is the restrictive and incorrect zoning
codes currently in force in most municipalities. Current codes do
not allow New Urbanism to be built, but do allow sprawl. Adopting a TND
ordinance and/or a system of 'smart codes' allows New Urbanism to be built
easily without having to rewrite existing codes.”

If you
go to the link above, you will see that New Urbanism (transect planning
plus) deals with everything but property rights. (Actually property rights
are verboten in this not-so-brave new world they are bringing us, so they
ignore them because property rights will not exist in the not to distant
future if we do not put a stop to this.) It is Sustainable Development
written in capitals and boldface. And how do they plan on doing this?
The
most effective way to implement New Urbanism is to plan for it, and write
it into zoning and development codes. This directs all future development
into this form.

1.
Hindman, Jo, Blame Metro, Caxton Press, 1966, p. 21.2.
Ibid. p.80.3.
Within APA would be a professional institute — the American Institute
of Certified Planners — that would be responsible for the national
certification of professional planners. “Although AIP was incorporated
in 1917 (as the American City Planning Institute, renamed the American
Institute of Planners in 1939), and ASPO in 1934, we actually trace our
roots further back to 1909 and the first National Conference on City Planning
in Washington, D.C. From that and subsequent conferences, the organized
planning movement emerged, first through our two predecessors and, since
1978, through APA.” (from APA
website)4.
AIP Constitution (1960).5.
Hindman, Blame Metro, p.116.6.
Baburov, et al, The Ideal Communist City, i Press Series on the human
environment, 1968.7.
“Transect Planning,” Duany, Andres and Emily Talen. APA Journal,
Summer 2002, Vol. 68, No. 3, p.245.8.
a term borrowed from “the notion of virtual reality. . .. When these
virtual environments are successful, they are said to be immersive --
virtual models that function as if they were actual environments.”9.
Ibid, p.247.

Kathleen Marquardt
has been in the freedom movement since before it was called that. She
was founder and chairman of Putting People First, a non-profit organization
combatting the animal rights movement. Her book, AnimalScam:
the Beastly Abuse of Human Rights, was published by Regnery in 1993.
Kathleen has been Vice President of American Policy Center since 2000
and is the Agenda 21/Sustainable Development expert for Rocky Top Freedom
Campaign. She is a contributing writer and researcher for Freedom Advocates.

Look at their definition
of transect for people and land planning: “Human beings also thrive
in different habitats. Some people prefer urban centers and would suffer
in a rural place, while others thrive in the rural or suburban zones.